The Cover Up by the Medical Establishment on Vitamin D Levels

Last Updated on June 5, 2022 by Shaun Snapp

Executive Summary

  • Vitamin D or D3 is hugely important for health, however, it has been deliberately de-emphasized by health authorities and the medical establishment.


While reviewing the treatments for covid, I found something of interest regarding the natural supplements that were as effective as drugs like Ivermectin and Vitamin D. I cover the logic for the supplements selected in the article Why Are Some Supplements Treatments Against Covid?

This article explains the clear de-emphasis on Vitamin D by health authorities.

Our References for This Article

If you want to see our references for this article and related Brightwork articles, visit this link.

Treatments for Covid

The following screenshots are from the website C19 Early, which tracks treatments for covid. Note the treatment name and then the improvement versus covid right next to it. The following significant value is the number of studies performed.

Most of the treatments in the table are drugs, and however, C19 Early also includes natural substances in the comparison table. I noted that the following natural supplements were often as effective as the drug treatments.

The logic that flowed from the table was to take supplements that showed a benefit against covid. These items address diet deficiencies and, therefore, are desirable to improve one’s immune system.

One of the most important of these vitamins also happens to be one that people are generally quite deficient in. This is Vitamin D.

Vitamin D3 (Aka Vitamin D)

Vitamin D is explained in this video. It also explains that the medical and pharmaceutical companies promoted very low levels of recommended Vitamin D is still being used. The evidence is that much higher levels of Vitamin D are necessary for the proper functioning of the immune system, but the FDA is not interested in updating their RDAs with this evidence. The study states that the medical establishment has ignored the studies on Vitamin D. The video states that the information on Vitamin D has not been updated by health authorities for 100 years.

  • Dr. Campbell states that he does not know why the recommended levels have not been updated. He calls the fact they don’t is a form of negligence.
  • But I believe he does know. It is due to pharmaceutical interests infecting public health. Dr. Campbell may be afraid of being punished by YouTube for saying why the Vitamin D RDA has not been increased to match the findings in the literature.

The video is absolutely fascinating and contains a deceptively large amount of information presented in a very effective way.

This study is being reviewed in the video by Dr. John Campbell (Doctorate in Nursing), which is consistent with a book I am relying on by Jeff T Bowles on Vitamin D3. This is explained also in the following quotation.

In a letter published last week in the journal Nutrients the scientists confirmed a calculation error noted by other investigators, by using a data set from a different population.

“Both these studies suggest that the IOM underestimated the requirement substantially,” said Garland. “The error has broad implications for public health regarding disease prevention and achieving the stated goal of ensuring that the whole population has enough vitamin D to maintain bone health.”

The recommended intake of vitamin D specified by the IOM is 600 IU/day through age 70 years, and 800 IU/day for older ages. “Calculations by us and other researchers have shown that these doses are only about one-tenth those needed to cut incidence of diseases related to vitamin D deficiency,” Garland explained.

Robert Heaney, M.D., of Creighton University wrote: “We call for the NAS-IOM and all public health authorities concerned with transmitting accurate nutritional information to the public to designate, as the RDA, a value of approximately 7,000 IU/day from all sources.”

“This intake is well below the upper level intake specified by IOM as safe for teens and adults, 10,000 IU/day,” Garland said. Other authors were C. Baggerly and C. French, of GrassrootsHealth, a voluntary organization in San Diego CA, and E.D. Gorham, Ph.D., of UC San Diego. – Science Daily

And also supported by this quote.

It’s now known that vitamin D is necessary not only for healthy bones but for health throughout the body. As a powerful epigenetic regulator, vitamin D influences that activity of more than 2,500 genes, and vitamin D receptors are present all over the body, including in the intestine, pancreas, prostate and immune system cells.7 Vitamin D plays a role in numerous diseases, including:

Acute respiratory tract infections
Chronic inflammatory diseases
Autoimmune diseases such as multiple sclerosis

Vitamin D receptors are present in nearly all cells of the human immune system, including monocytes/macrophages, T cells, B cells, natural killer cells and dendritic cells. Vitamin D has multiple actions on the immune system, including enhancing the production of antimicrobial peptides by immune cells, reducing damaging pro-inflammatory cytokines and promoting the expression of anti-inflammatory cytokines.

Many COVID-19 therapeutics are focused on viral elimination instead of modulating the hyper-inflammation often seen in the disease. In fact, uncontrolled immune response has been suggested as a factor in disease severity, making immunomodulation “an attractive potential treatment strategy.” – The Epoch Times

Vitamin D is also credited with slowing the aging process.

What is Vitamin D?

  • Vitamin D is not actually a vitamin. It is a fat-soluble prohormone, which is what the body uses to create a hormone.
  • It alters the expression in many genes.
  • This hormone communicates the change of season to the body — and tells the body whether to prepare for winter and to conserve resources or to use more resources.

The fact that Vitamin D is a prohormone is shocking to many, as it should be, as it is called a vitamin. This has a confusing history but also is responsible for significant misunderstandings due to this misnaming.

The War on Vitamin D

There has been a long-term strategy by the medical establishment to dissuade people from taking Vitamin D supplements. This has included making up false claims around Vitamin D toxicity.

The following quote is a perfect example of this attempt to de-emphasize.

Nearly nine out of 10 upstate New Yorkers have no medical reason to have their vitamin D levels tested, yet health care providers and patients continue to frequently request the test, according to an analysis released today by Excellus BlueCross BlueShield.

Last year, 641,000 upstate New Yorkers had their vitamin D levels tested, and about 42 percent did so without a medical indication for it. Typically, only people with certain conditions, including but not limited to osteoporosis, kidney and liver disease, malabsorption syndromes, bone disorders and certain endocrine conditions, are candidates for testing. Older adults and some pregnant or lactating women also can expect to have their doctors recommend vitamin D testing.

This makes no sense. The WHO states that around 90% of people are deficient in Vitamin D. So why would a test for Vitamin D not be warranted? Observe what Blue Cross considers a “medical indication” for Vitamin D, which is some type of disease. However, Vitamin D deficiency is the norm. Yet, Blue Cross only considers a specific medical condition to be a reason to get a Vitamin D test. If this does not demonstrate the lack of orientation around prevention by the establishment medical system, I don’t know what else could illustrate this. Something else curious and inconsistent is that the medical system is known for ordering large numbers of unnecessary tests either to increase the utilization of hospital equipment or to practice defensive medicine. These diagnostic tests are extremely expensive in most cases. However, establishment medicine does not critique these very expensive and unnecessary tests but shows concern for a relatively inexpensive test for Vitamin D deficiency.

The comment continues…

Widespread testing is associated with potentially unnecessary treatments with supplements, retesting and increased medical costs. On average, a vitamin D deficiency test can cost $50, typically covered by health insurance. In 2014 in upstate New York, an estimated $33 million was spent on vitamin D testing, according to an Excellus BCBS infographic, “Vitamin D Tests.” High-dose, prescription-strength vitamin D supplements may have an out-of-pocket cost for the patient, depending on his or her level of health insurance coverage.

Why are treatments with supplements unnecessary? What a bizarre thing to write. Vitamin D is critical to the health and to the prevention of the aforementioned negative health conditions.

Secondly, the Blue Cross bemoans the cost of Vitamin D testing that is passed on to the State of New York. However, where is the concern for unnecessary and very expensive medical diagnostic tests? These costs of these are enormous, but this is how the medical establishment and hospitals make their money, so this won’t be pointed out by Blue Cross. Or will they. I found this article on this topic by Blue Cross.

Avalon provided a pre-service approval system for providers as well that helped reduce inappropriate lab services by ensuring that tests were necessary and under Blue Cross NC’s coverage policies, according to the press release.

“Our collaboration with Avalon has given us more insight into improving the quality and reducing the cost of lab services for our members,” Roberta Capp, MD, chief medical officer of Blue Cross NC, stated in the press release. “As these results show, Blue Cross NC members benefit from our ongoing efforts to make health care better, simpler, and more affordable.” – Health Payer Intelligence

Overall, the perspective was much less judgemental and was about optimizing the use of lab services — rather than mostly eliminating the testing, as in the case of Blue Cross’ article on Vitamin D testing.

The comment from the Vitamin D Blue Cross article continues…

Vitamin D is an essential vitamin in how our bodies function. It helps our bodies absorb calcium, which keeps our bones and muscles — including the heart — healthy and strong. “Most people get enough vitamin D through the foods they eat and the time they spend in the sun,” said Bartels.

No, that is incorrect. And it is a mantra at this point by MDs who spend no time evaluating either the diet’s of most of their patients. This is also expressed in an article at the American Medical Association’s website.

“With regards to vitamins, most of us are able to get our required nutrients via our diet,” said Dr. Stanford. “If we have a well-balanced diet consisting of lean proteins, whole grains, fruits and vegetables, then we should find that we don’t necessarily need vitamins or have supplements on board.”

Would this MD like to take a guess as to what percentage of people get this well balanced diet? Are they supposed to use the USDA’s MyPlate to figure out this diet?

This is the type of information provided by the USDA on dietary guidance. It is designed by processed food companies to be minimally helpful. It places beans and many other vegetables into the “protein category” in order to have the population eat more meat than is healthy to satisfy the powerful meat lobby. 

There is widespread Vitamin D deficiency. This is widely acknowledged and is impossible not to see if one reviews the scientific literature on the topic.

Certainly, if the assumption is that most people get sufficient Vitamin D from foods or the sun, then this claim would be true, but this assumption is false. This is a common assumption made by medical professionals and it is a lazy blanket statement by MDs who do not seem to be current with the research into vitamin and mineral deficiency.

They also leave out the fact that most people do not have healthy diets. It seems that everytime an MD makes a statement about vitamins and minerals they have not bothered to read the scientific literature. It might be better for public health if MDs just stated they do not care about diet, vitamins, or minerals and will not put in any time to understand them. This perspective of trying to get MDs and the medical establishment to accurately represent nutrition information has been a complete failure. They repeat the line about all vitamins and minerals coming from the diet like robots who can’t be bothered to actually check. And the problem is that the FDA tells people to consult their MDs before taking supplements! As is explained in the following quotation.

Before making decisions about whether to take a supplement, talk to your healthcare provider. They can help you achieve a balance between the foods and nutrients you personally need. – FDA

Yes, before you decide on supplements, talk to an MD who has been fed false information by pharmaceutical companies and has no expertise, and does not make money from supplements. As can be seen earlier in this article, the recommendation by MDs is that people do not need supplements unless they have a specific medical condition. This is the same thing as the FDA telling patients to ask Pfizer if they should take supplements. Why would Pfizer care? They don’t sell supplements.

The comment from the Vitamin D Blue Cross article continues…

“Past studies have linked vitamin D deficiency to numerous conditions, such as heart disease and cancer, so patients and physicians started demanding more tests,” said Bartels. “A more recent critical analysis of these reports shows significant flaws, leading many in the medical community to question the necessity of widespread testing.”

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recently found the current medical evidence insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for vitamin D deficiency in asymptomatic adults.

The American Society of Clinical Pathology contributed the following recommendation to Choosing Wisely®, “Many people have low levels of vitamin D, but few have seriously low levels. Most of us don’t need a vitamin D test. We just need to make simple changes so we get enough vitamin D.”

“The medical evidence for any benefits of routine testing for vitamin D deficiency in healthy adults and children is insufficient,” concluded Bartels. “Excellus BCBS’s goal in reviewing the data and publishing an infographic on the subject is to encourage informed discussions between patients and their doctors.” – Blue Cross/Blue Sheild

The following quotes from a research paper on the topic of Vitamin D contradict everything in this previous quote from Blue Cross/Blue Shield. And there are numerous research papers that say essentially the same thing.

Recent evidence for the nonskeletal effects of vitamin D, coupled with recognition that vitamin D deficiency is common, has revived interest in this hormone.

Average daily vitamin D intake in the population at large and current dietary reference intake values are often inadequate to maintain optimal vitamin D levels.

Worldwide, naturally occurring dietary sources of vitamin D are limited, and food fortification is optional, inconsistent, inadequate, or nonexistent. Therefore, for most people, vitamin D is primarily obtained by cutaneous production from sun exposure. However, many variables influence the amount of UVB from sunlight that reaches the skin and its effectiveness. These include time of day, season, latitude, altitude, clothing, sunscreen use, pigmentation, and age. In Minnesota in 2008, less than half of days provided enough solar UVB radiation at noon to effect cutaneous vitamin D production.2 Even those who normally reside in sunny climates are commonly found to be deficient in vitamin D, probably due to cultural habits and/or dress.

Vitamin D deficiency is more common than previously thought. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has reported that the percentage of adults achieving vitamin D sufficiency as defined by 25(OH)D of at least 30 ng/mL (to convert to nmol/L, multiply by 2.496) has declined from about 60% in 1988-1994 to approximately 30% in 2001-2004 in whites and from about 10% to approximately 5% in African Americans during this same time. – NCBI

This video describes how Vitamin D is being deliberately discounted by health authorities. It also explains that the claims around the risk of Vitamin D overdosage (the fat soluble argument) is based only on Vitamin A overdosage. Vitamin A overdosage is a problem, but other fat soluble vitamins are not a problem for overdose. The body can break down Vitamin D if the level in the body is too high. Furthermore, while the vaccines are ineffective and unsafe, countries around the world could have easily beaten the vaccines by simply distributing Vitamin D. 

Everyone of the people in this video are on Vitamin D supplements.


There has been enormous suppression of the benefits of Vitamin D by health authorities. It is counterproductive to go to the medical establishment, pharmaceutical companies or MDs on the topic of nutrition and supplementation. This was demonstrated very clearly in the health authorities response to covid, where there was zero effort put into explaining to the population how to improve one’s immune system, and nearly all of the focus was placed on wearing masks, locking down, and waiting for vaccines, which I cover in the article A Comparison of How Much Effort the CDC Puts Into Immunity Versus Vaccines.

It almost appears that the medical establishment would like the population to think that vaccines work without having anything to do with the immune system. And that a person who puts no effort into keeping a strong immune system, but gets vaccinated by a dangerous and ineffective vaccine is responsible and a “good person.” But a person who puts effort into developing a strong immune system, but does not take dangerous and ineffective vaccines is irresponsible and a “bad person.”

  • Their pattern of behavior vis-a-vis Vitamin D and in suppressing information about Vitamin D makes it appear that the medical establishment is scared that Vitamin D might be too effective, and undermine their position as the providers of health.
  • This explains why the scientific literature on the benefits of Vitamin D has been ignored by health authorities and why they came up with exaggerated stories of Vitamin D overdose.

Thinking a bit on this, instilling fears of overdoses is a well-worn strategy of the medical establishment. While they exaggerate the overdoses of Vitamin D or Ivermectin, they are virtually silent and actively suppress the adverse reactions from pharmaceuticals, particularly pharmaceuticals that are on a patent.

Vitamin and Mineral Deficiency Testing

The costs of vitamin and mineral deficiency testing are prohibitive as is shown at this link. However, at those costs, it is far more cost-effective to just buy supplements.

Be Notified When Our Upcoming Subscription Website on Ivermectin and Other Medical Treatments is Ready

Ivermectin has many treatment applications outside of its approved use (as an antiparasitical. These treatments include cancer, covid, immunity, and more. And due to perverse financial incentives, many of these applications are hidden from the public.

Due to the many questions we receive on Ivermectin, we are now working on a subscription website that covers everything related to Ivermectin ranging from its many health improvement applications to dosages, and contrasting this with the false information presented on Ivermectin by medical authorities. The site will be ready soon as we are making good progress. We will also be adding questions from subscribers answered as customized articles. 

If you are potentially interested in subscribing, contact us using the text chat widget in the lower right-hand corner of this page and just tell us you are interested in being informed when the website is live.